I think Adobe should ditch Lightroom for the Mac not long after. And sock it to Apple the way Apple waylaid Flash.

Then you'd see hordes of pro photographers ditch Apple completely.

I'm a life-long die-hard Mac user but Apple's lack of concern for professionals since the iRevolution is disconcerting.

1) And how do you think that would affect Adobe sales of Lightroom? How do you think that would affect Apple's sales of Macs? I'll spell it out: If they Adobe doesn't make Lightroom for Mac Adobe loses 100% of Lightroom for Mac sales. But If Adobe doesn't make Lightroom for Mac Apple may lose only a very small portion of their Mac sales. How is that good for Adobe?

2) Apple didn't stop Flash on the Mac and all the fault for Flash not being on mobile devices today rests on Adobe's shoulders.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

2) Apple didn't stop Flash on the Mac and all the fault for Flash not being on mobile devices today rests on Adobe's shoulders.

I still use flash, not by choice mind you there are just so many sites that still utilize it. One of favourite Web apps audiotool.com/app has promised that they will be going html5 for about two years now, which is unfortunate as I want nothing but to be able to run it on my iPad. Though Apple will probably have to increase the memory to at least 2Gb before I can use it properly as it's a bit of a memory hog.

When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.

Funny thing is that since I don't have Flash installed, whenever I come across a site that has something in Flash which I want to see I simply grab my 1st gen iPad. Works for most videos, works for Google Street View, for the occasional moment I use that.

The upside of not having Flash on my Mac is probably way bigger for me. I don't like moving things on a website, I don't like text flashing by et cetera.

I still use flash, not by choice mind you there are just so many sites that still utilize it. One of favourite Web apps audiotool.com/app has promised that they will be going html5 for about two years now, which is unfortunate as I want nothing but to be able to run it on my iPad. Though Apple will probably have to increase the memory to at least 2Gb before I can use it properly as it's a bit of a memory hog.

Even Apple used a little Flash for MobileMe, which lasted until late 2011. It was limited to uploading files via the browser but it was still a use of Flash. That site being all Flash is just awful. No wonder they need until 2016.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Funny thing is that since I don't have Flash installed, whenever I come across a site that has something in Flash which I want to see I simply grab my 1st gen iPad. Works for most videos, works for Google Street View, for the occasional moment I use that.

The upside of not having Flash on my Mac is probably way bigger for me. I don't like moving things on a website, I don't like text flashing by et cetera.

I do have Flash installed but I also have the ClickToFlash extension installed (as well as AdBlock and Ghostery) which helps reduce animations and battery drain considerably. I also have Chrome installed for those odd cases where the site doesn't work with all that enabled and it's not something I'll be going to often.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

I think Adobe should ditch Lightroom for the Mac not long after. And sock it to Apple the way Apple waylaid Flash.

Then you'd see hordes of pro photographers ditch Apple completely.

I'm a life-long die-hard Mac user but Apple's lack of concern for professionals since the iRevolution is disconcerting.

Apple makes most of their money from the iConsumer crowd, that being said though Apple still caters to the professional or did you miss the release of one one of the most powerful workstations available. Yes Apple has been dropping their professional apps one by one but that doesn't mean there aren't hundreds of other third party apps to take their place. Suggesting that Adobe drop support for a company that is basically their bread and butter for the sole reason of revenge is an absurd suggestion. You can't expect Apple to cater to your every need, get over it and move on, Lightroom is a better program anyway. As far as Flash is concerned just buy a Surface PRO, the new one is an absolute gem.

When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.

I do have Flash installed but I also have the ClickToFlash extension installed (as well as AdBlock and Ghostery) which helps reduce animations and battery drain considerably. I also have Chrome installed for those odd cases where the site doesn't work with all that enabled and it's not something I'll be going to often.

How good is ClickToFlash, is it worth the purchase?

When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.

Funny thing is that since I don't have Flash installed, whenever I come across a site that has something in Flash which I want to see I simply grab my 1st gen iPad. Works for most videos, works for Google Street View, for the occasional moment I use that.

The upside of not having Flash on my Mac is probably way bigger for me. I don't like moving things on a website, I don't like text flashing by et cetera.

Flash isn't just for pretty moving sites, there are some pretty incredible and useful Web apps that use Flash. Check out audiotool.com/app it's a really good example of what can be accomplish with good Flash programming. I use it to create ambient sounds and beats for background filler.

When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.

I do have Flash installed but I also have the ClickToFlash extension installed (as well as AdBlock and Ghostery) which helps reduce animations and battery drain considerably. I also have Chrome installed for those odd cases where the site doesn't work with all that enabled and it's not something I'll be going to often.

I used to have the same config, but when Apple releases a new version of OSX (not a point release) I format my SSD and do a clean install. Last time I didn't install Flash plus Click2Flash as I wanted to see if I could do without it. Apparently this works ok for me.

About Chrome, is installing it 'dangerous'? I remember the outcry from people who discovered Goolge was sending home quite some data after inserts installed Google Earth. I wonder if the same applies to Chrome, though I haven't looked it up.

Flash isn't just for pretty moving sites, there are some pretty incredible and useful Web apps that use Flash. Check out audiotool.com/app it's a really good example of what can be accomplish with good Flash programming. I use it to create ambient sounds and beats for background filler.

Good point. Indeed, Flash isn't limited to playing videos. I believe @mstone usually points people out on its usefulness.

I'll try your link next time I'm behind a PC with Flash installed, as I can't see it on my iPad now.

I think Adobe should ditch Lightroom for the Mac not long after. And sock it to Apple the way Apple waylaid Flash.

Then you'd see hordes of pro photographers ditch Apple completely.

I'm a life-long die-hard Mac user but Apple's lack of concern for professionals since the iRevolution is disconcerting.

Maybe you haven't noticed, but the majority of Adobe.tv, all training and demo materials, plus a large majority of Adobe's employees and users are on Macs and have been for many years. There was a slight defection in the early years of the new millenium and the development of OSX and the Carbon vs. Cocoa Wars.

As for Flash: you do know that Apple leading the way to kill that never ending security leak and battery draining software has most benefitted Microsoft and Android users, don't you?

You should learn to think before you post such nonsense next time.

Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member

If you want to play Flash videos on your Mac without installing Flash player and without installing Click To Flash, just go in to Safari Preferences, Advanced Tab, and select "Show Develop Menu in Menu Bar". Then, when a site says "Sorry, Flash is Required to Play This Video" select Develop menu->User Agent->Safari iOS 7 iPad. Your Mac will reload the page pretending it's an iPad. 9 times out of 10 the site will be fooled and will send you an HTML5/H.264 video.

As a pro photographer operating 5 studios for 30 years, with daily experience on Lightroom and Aperture, nothing, I repeat NOTHING, compares to Aperture. From the beginning it supported a clean Apple-like interface, efficient operation, and simple file management option. Lightroom has more tools - big deal. If I want every photo tool ever known to man I can open up Photoshop... I see no reason why Apple is dumping Aperture other than Tim Cook's lack of innovation. Tim - replacing 2 user specific products with a 1 size fits all hack, isn't innovation, it's resting on the laurels of those who came before you. I have the Creative Cloud subscription, but use Aperture for everything that I can.

That a very good point, there is a clear distinction between the type of Flash elements. And telling the web server I'm an iPad client may serve up that videoclip as H.264 or something, it indeed won't do much/often on other elements.

And I don't see any change in this for the foreseeable future, as it is now, what, over 5 years that the iPhone and iPad are such common place? Nope, Flash is here to stay.

Oh well, I could always install the plugin, together with ClickToFlash as I used to have until last year.

There is also a possibility that no one seems to be considering: maybe Photos will be really awesome. Why is everyone assuming that it will suck, that Apple no longer cares about Pros or about photos, and that the only solution is to migrate to Lightroom? What makes everyone think that the new Photos won't be feature-rich when it debuts, and a perfect replacement for both iPhoto and Aperture?

I'm going to remain optimistic about it all, and assume that the replacement will be better than its predecessors.

Can you also give me the winning lotto numbers for Friday? Or maybe you have a direct line to TC. I's like you to forward some of my thoughts, please.

On a serious note, some reviewers are trying to play this down. Their reasoning is that Apple would never destroy a good product that holds some sort of competitive edge without leveraging it. I disagree. Post Jobs Apple has lost the creativity edge so all they have to play with is the direction that was plotted before Jobs' departure. That line is to converge all platforms and make it universally easy for most of the users on this planet to do most of what they need. Everyone else is acceptable collateral damage, as long as they are not too many. Unfortunately, photo enthusiasts and pros are merely a blip on the screen, so TC will cut them because he doesn't have the imagination to figure something out. Simple as that. Photographers and photography are absolutely irrelevant to Apple's current strategy. It is the ability to share everything with everyone across all platforms and devices with a uniform UI. This is the mantra. Apple couldn't care less for photography. (remember Maps??!!)

My main library since 2011 has over 100K images and uses over 1TB of storage (backup not included). I am waiting full of excitement to see that price tag for storing all my photos in the cloud. Oh, almost forgot: let's factor in those RAW files from the 36MP D810! My workflow is relying on having the RAW files accessible at a file system level. Good luck to me doing that with iCloud, TimCloud or any other cloud out there. Good luck to me doing that with Lightroom.

I have no clue what I am going to do, but I know one thing: I am NOT waiting for the Photos Miracle!

I think Adobe should ditch Lightroom for the Mac not long after. And sock it to Apple the way Apple waylaid Flash.

Then you'd see hordes of pro photographers ditch Apple completely.

I'm a life-long die-hard Mac user but Apple's lack of concern for professionals since the iRevolution is disconcerting.

Apple makes most of their money from the iConsumer crowd, that being said though Apple still caters to the professional or did you miss the release of one one of the most powerful workstations available. Yes Apple has been dropping their professional apps one by one but that doesn't mean there aren't hundreds of other third party apps to take their place. Suggesting that Adobe drop support for a company that is basically their bread and butter for the sole reason of revenge is an absurd suggestion. You can't expect Apple to cater to your every need, get over it and move on, Lightroom is a better program anyway. As far as Flash is concerned just buy a Surface PRO, the new one is an absolute gem.

And in addition, I imagine that a good proportion of Aperture users will be happy with Photos.

"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."- African proverb

As a pro photographer operating 5 studios for 30 years, with daily experience on Lightroom and Aperture, nothing, I repeat NOTHING, compares to Aperture. From the beginning it supported a clean Apple-like interface, efficient operation, and simple file management option. Lightroom has more tools - big deal. If I want every photo tool ever known to man I can open up Photoshop... I see no reason why Apple is dumping Aperture other than Tim Cook's lack of innovation. Tim - replacing 2 user specific products with a 1 size fits all hack, isn't innovation, it's resting on the laurels of those who came before you. I have the Creative Cloud subscription, but use Aperture for everything that I can.

Shame you can't see beyond your nose.

"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."- African proverb

There is also a possibility that no one seems to be considering: maybe Photos will be really awesome. Why is everyone assuming that it will suck, that Apple no longer cares about Pros or about photos, and that the only solution is to migrate to Lightroom? What makes everyone think that the new Photos won't be feature-rich when it debuts, and a perfect replacement for both iPhoto and Aperture?

I'm going to remain optimistic about it all, and assume that the replacement will be better than its predecessors.

Exactly! And what anyone with their head screwed on properly should think.

"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."- African proverb

And in addition, I imagine that a good proportion of Aperture users will be happy with Photos.

It really depends on what Photos can do. I'm not sure if you use Aperture, but it has a very specific set of functionality - it's definitely a professional application, and various "standard" photo apps (at the moment) don't come close to it.

My view is that I'm not pre-judging the situation, except to say that Apple isn't stupid; I expect that Photos on Yosemite will likely incorporate a lot of the stuff that Aperture already does. It may initially be lighter on features, but I'm hopeful that Apple will address that in further iterations.

This idea that Apple have lost their creative/innovative spark just doesn't hold water in my view, especially after the most recent WWDC, which felt very lively and full of ideas.

About Chrome, is installing it 'dangerous'? I remember the outcry from people who discovered Goolge was sending home quite some data after inserts installed Google Earth. I wonder if the same applies to Chrome, though I haven't looked it up.

I don't know if they are "dangerous" but having Little Snitch in my system, I saw two or three (i don't remember exactly) Google binaries trying to call home. I have no idea what information they transmit. I let them alone for some time and they tried to contact the mother ship very often (like many times a day). Then I decided to block them altogether. In fact I don't use any Google standalone application anymore. Even I switched to duckduckgo for the web search. From time to time I may use Google Maps or the translation service. That's all. Google tracks every footstep you make; for your own good.

On the other hand, Little Snitch is one of the top must-have applications for the Mac.

I don't know if they are "dangerous" but having Little Snitch in my system, I saw two or three (i don't remember exactly) Google binaries trying to call home. I have no idea what information they transmit. I let them alone for some time and they tried to contact the mother ship very often (like many times a day). Then I decided to block them altogether. In fact I don't use any Google standalone application anymore. Even I switched to duckduckgo for the web search. From time to time I may use Google Maps or the translation service. That's all. Google tracks every footstep you make; for your own good.

On the other hand, Little Snitch is one of the top must-have applications for the Mac.

About Chrome, is installing it 'dangerous'? I remember the outcry from people who discovered Goolge was sending home quite some data after inserts installed Google Earth. I wonder if the same applies to Chrome, though I haven't looked it up.

I don't know if they are "dangerous" but having Little Snitch in my system, I saw two or three (i don't remember exactly) Google binaries trying to call home. I have no idea what information they transmit. I let them alone for some time and they tried to contact the mother ship very often (like many times a day). Then I decided to block them altogether. In fact I don't use any Google standalone application anymore. Even I switched to duckduckgo for the web search. From time to time I may use Google Maps or the translation service. That's all. Google tracks every footstep you make; for your own good.

On the other hand, Little Snitch is one of the top must-have applications for the Mac.

Thanks for replying to that old post! So it is indeed doing something in the background, and apparently not needed as you now have it blocked and GE still work I understand(?)